Twice the time, double the charges

Final cost of construction of Zero Point Interchange Rs4.1 billion, almost twice the initial budget of Rs2.27 billion.


Express November 09, 2010

ISLAMABAD: The final cost of Zero Point Interchange (ZPI), at Rs4.1 billion, is almost twice the initial budget of Rs2.27 billion.

Back in 2006, when the proposal for the project was first prepared by the National Highway Authority (NHA), the estimated cost of the project was Rs2.27 billion. The final cost of the project has risen by more than 80 per cent due to inflation and other ‘adjustments’.

One such adjustment was to accommodate a national monument on a cliff near the Zero Point crossing. Construction work on the project started in September 2009 after a series of design changes to accommodate this monument. Construction work on the project will complete in December this year.

As per rules, the original proposal — known in officialese as the PC-1 — has to be revised when the cost of a project changes.

Documents with The Express Tribune reveal that while Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani was briefed about the cost of construction material rising by about 210  per cent from NHA rates in 2006 (in about 18 months), the PC-1 was never revised.

Official sources inside the authority said that Consultant Engineering CDA Lt Col (Retd) Naseem Qureshi had raised concerns over this odd situation in a CDA board meeting but the situation was not rectified.

Member Engineering Capital Development Authority (CDA), Abdul Jabbar Malano, when contacted, conceded that PC-1 was yet to be revised. He said that CDA committee had completed work on the revised document and only the procedural requirements were left to get it approved from the planning division. He added that construction of an additional loop near Pakistan Monument was the main reason of escalation in the project’s cost.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 9th, 2010.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ